Skip main navigation
Close Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Articles

The Dark Side of Organizational Paradoxes: The Dynamics of Disempowerment

    Published Online:29 Apr 2021https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2017.0208

    Abstract

    The idea that interdependent and persistent tensions are intrinsic to organizing is now well accepted. Organizational paradox theory has further stressed the importance of accepting such paradoxes, to convert them into generative forces. However, this recommendation assumes actors have full agency in responding to paradoxes and, therefore, overlooks the role of power dynamics. We expand on paradox theory by drawing attention to organizational pragmatic paradoxes: contradictory demands received within the context of an intense managerial relationship, such as when a subordinate is ordered to “take initiative.” Our model highlights how organizational pragmatic paradoxes derive from power relations restricting actors’ capacities for enacting legitimate responses to tensions. Specifically, we link different organizational power dimensions to various manifestations of pragmatic paradoxes. We further outline concrete actions for mitigating the occurrence of these pathological phenomena. Our conceptualization contributes to a critical reading of paradox theory that is sensitive to power inequalities.

    REFERENCES

    • Abdallah, C., Denis, J.-L., & Langley, A. 2011. Having your cake and eating it too: Discourses of transcendence and their role in organizational change dynamics. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 24: 333–348. Google Scholar
    • Acker, J. 2006. Inequality regimes: Gender, class, and race in organizations. Gender & Society, 20: 441–464. Google Scholar
    • Adler, P., Forbes, L., & Willmott, H. 2007. Critical management studies. Academy of Management Annals, 1: 119–179.Link , Google Scholar
    • Aldred, J. 2019. Licence to be bad: How economics corrupted us. London, U.K.: Penguin Books. Google Scholar
    • Alvesson, M., & Spicer, A. 2012. A stupidity‐based theory of organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 49: 1194–1220. Google Scholar
    • Alvesson, M., & Spicer, A. 2016. The stupidity paradox: The power and pitfalls of functional stupidity at work. London, U.K.: Profile Books. Google Scholar
    • Alvesson, M., & Willmott, H. 1992. On the idea of emancipation in management and organization studies. Academy of Management Review, 17: 432–464.Link , Google Scholar
    • Alvesson, M., & Willmott, H. 2002. Identity regulation as organizational control: Producing the appropriate individual. Journal of Management Studies, 39: 619–644. Google Scholar
    • Andriopoulos, C., & Lewis, M. W. 2009. Exploitation–exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: Managing paradoxes of innovation. Organization Science, 20: 696–717. Google Scholar
    • Anicich, E. M., & Hirsh, J. B. 2017. The psychology of middle power: Vertical code-switching, role conflict, and behavioral inhibition. Academy of Management Review, 42: 659–682.Link , Google Scholar
    • Antoncic, B., & Hisrich, R. D. 2001. Intrapreneurship: Construct refinement and cross-cultural validation. Journal of Business Venturing, 16: 495–527. Google Scholar
    • Ashforth, B. 1994. Petty tyranny in organizations. Human Relations, 47: 755–778. Google Scholar
    • Bachrach, P., & Baratz, M. S. 1962. Two faces of power. American Political Science Review, 56: 947–952. Google Scholar
    • Balogun, J., Jacobs, C., Jarzabkowski, P., Mantere, S., & Vaara, E. 2014. Placing strategy discourse in context: Sociomateriality, sensemaking, and power. Journal of Management Studies, 51: 175–201. Google Scholar
    • Banner, M. 2018. Wu-wei: Concept analysis of a conceptual paradox. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 39: 304–310. Google Scholar
    • Bateson, G. 1972. Steps to an ecology of mind: Collected essays in anthropology, psychiatry, evolution, and epistemology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
    • Bateson, G., Jackson, D. D., Haley, J., & Weakland, J. H. 1956. Toward a theory of schizophrenia. Behavioral Science, 1: 251–264. Google Scholar
    • Bateson, G., Jackson, D. D., Haley, J., & Weakland, J. H. 1963. A note on the double bind. Family Process, 2: 154–161. Google Scholar
    • Battilana, J., & Dorado, S. J. A. J. 2010. Building sustainable hybrid organizations: The case of commercial microfinance organizations. Academy of management Journal, 53: 1419–1440.Link , Google Scholar
    • Bechky, B. A. 2006. Talking about machines, thick description, and knowledge work. Organization Studies, 27: 1757–1768. Google Scholar
    • Bednarek, R., Paroutis, S., & Sillince, J. 2017. Transcendence through rhetorical practices: Responding to paradox in the science sector. Organization Studies, 38: 77–101. Google Scholar
    • Bergström, O., Styhre, A., & Thilander, P. 2014. Paradoxifying organizational change: Cynicism and resistance in the Swedish Armed Forces. Journal of Change Management, 14: 384–404. Google Scholar
    • Brown, A. D., Kornberger, M., Clegg, S. R., & Carter, C. 2010. “Invisible walls” and “silent hierarchies”: A case study of power relations in an architecture firm. Human Relations, 63: 525–549. Google Scholar
    • Budd, J. W., Gollan, P. J., & Wilkinson, A. 2010. New approaches to employee voice and participation in organizations. Human Relations, 63: 303–310. Google Scholar
    • Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. 1979. Sociological paradigms and organisational analysis. London, U.K.: Heinemann. Google Scholar
    • Carter, C., Clegg, S., Hogan, J., & Kornberger, M. 2003. The polyphonic spree: The case of the Liverpool Dockers. Industrial Relations Journal, 34: 290–304. Google Scholar
    • Castells, M. 2009. The rise of the network society. Hoboken, NY: John Wiley & Sons. Google Scholar
    • Cederström, C., & Spicer, A. 2015. The wellness syndrome. Cambridge, U.K.: Polity. Google Scholar
    • Chen, M.-J. 2002. Transcending paradox: The Chinese “middle way” perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 19: 179–199. Google Scholar
    • Clegg, S. R. 1989. Frameworks of power. London, U.K.: SAGE. Google Scholar
    • Clegg, S. R. 2002. General introduction. In S. R. Clegg (Ed.), Management and organization paradoxes: 1–10. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing. Google Scholar
    • Clegg, S. R. 2009. Foundations of organization power. Journal of Power, 2: 35–64. Google Scholar
    • Clegg, S. R., Cunha, M. P., Munro, I., Rego, A., & de Sousa, M. O. 2016. Kafkaesque power and bureaucracy. Journal of Political Power, 9: 157–181. Google Scholar
    • Clegg, S. R., da Cunha, J. V., & Cunha, M. P. e. 2002. Management paradoxes: A relational view. Human Relations, 55: 483–503. Google Scholar
    • Clegg, S. R., & Haugaard, M. (Eds.). 2009. SAGE handbook of power. London, U.K.: SAGE. Google Scholar
    • Clegg, S. R., & Kornberger, M. 2006. Space, organizations and management theory. Copenhagen, Denmark: Copenhagen Business School Press. Google Scholar
    • Cohen, L. J. 1950. Mr. O’Connor’s pragmatic paradoxes. Mind, 59: 85–87. Google Scholar
    • Contu, A., & Willmott, H. 2003. Re-embedding situatedness: The importance of power relations in learning theory. Organization Science, 14: 283–296. Google Scholar
    • Courpasson, D. 2017. Beyond the hidden/public resistance divide: How bloggers defeated a big company. Organization Studies, 38: 1277–1302. Google Scholar
    • Courpasson, D., Dany, F., & Clegg, S. R. 2012. Resisters at work: Generating productive resistance in the workplace. Organization Science, 23: 801–819. Google Scholar
    • Crozier, M., & Friedberg, E. 1980. Actors and systems: The politics of collective action. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
    • Cuganesan, S. 2017. Identity paradoxes: How senior managers and employees negotiate similarity and distinctiveness tensions over time. Organization Studies, 38: 489–511. Google Scholar
    • Cunha, M. P., & Putnam, L. L. 2019. Paradox theory and the paradox of success. Strategic Organization, 17: 95–106. Google Scholar
    • Cunha, M. P., Simpson, A. V., Clegg, S. R., & Rego, A. 2019. Speak! Paradoxical effects of a managerial culture of “speaking up.” British Journal of Management, 30: 829–846. Google Scholar
    • Currie, G., Lockett, A., & Suhomlinova, O. 2009. The institutionalization of distributed leadership: A “catch-22” in English public services. Human Relations, 62: 1735–1761. Google Scholar
    • Czarniawska, B. 1997. Narrating the organization: Dramas of institutional identity. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
    • Czarniawska, B. 2017. Bruno Latour and Niklas Luhmann as organization theorists. European Management Journal, 35: 145–150. Google Scholar
    • Da Cunha, J. V., & Cunha, M. P. e. 2001. Brave new (paradoxical) world: Structure and improvisation in virtual teams. Strategic Change, 10: 337–347. Google Scholar
    • Dahl, R. A. 1957. The concept of power. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 2: 201–215. Google Scholar
    • Dale, K., & Burrell, G. 2008. The spaces of organisation and the organisation of space: Power, identity and materiality at work. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar
    • Davis, G. F. 2013. After the corporation. Politics & Society, 2: 283–308. Google Scholar
    • Deroy, X., & Clegg, S. R. 2015. Back in the USSR: Introducing recursive contingency into institutional theory. Organization Studies, 36: 73–90. Google Scholar
    • Dopson, S., & Neumann, J. E. 1998. Uncertainty, contrariness and the double-bind: Middle managers’ reactions to changing contracts. British Journal of Management, 9: S53–S70. Google Scholar
    • Dovey, K. 1999. Framing places: Mediating power in built form. London, U.K.: Routledge. Google Scholar
    • du Gay, P. 2000. In praise of bureaucracy: Weber, organization, ethics. London, U.K.: SAGE. Google Scholar
    • du Gay, P., & Vikkelsø, S. 2016. For formal organization: The past in the present and future of organization theory. Oxford U.K.: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
    • Dutton, J. E., Worline, M. C., Frost, P. J., & Lilius, J. 2006. Explaining compassion organizing. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51: 59–96. Google Scholar
    • Edmondson, A. 1999. Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44: 350–383. Google Scholar
    • Ekman, S. 2012. Authority and autonomy: Paradoxes in modern knowledge work. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar
    • El-Sawad, A., Arnold, J., & Cohen, L. 2004. “Doublethink”: The prevalence and function of contradiction in accounts of organizational life. Human Relations, 57: 1179–1203. Google Scholar
    • Eltantawy, N., & Wiest, J. B. 2011. The Arab spring: Social media in the Egyptian revolution—reconsidering resource mobilization theory. International Journal of Communication, 5: 18. Google Scholar
    • Emirbayer, M., & Mische, A. 1998. What is agency? American Journal of Sociology, 103: 962–1023. Google Scholar
    • Fairhurst, G. T., Smith, W. K., Banghart, S. G., Lewis, M. W., Putnam, L. L., Raisch, S., & Schad, J. 2016. Diverging and converging: Integrative insights on a paradox meta-perspective. Academy of Management Annals, 10: 173–182.Link , Google Scholar
    • Farjoun, M. 2010. Beyond dualism: Stability and change as a duality. Academy of Management Review, 35: 202–225.Link , Google Scholar
    • Farjoun, M. 2016. Contradictions, dialectics. In A. LangleyH. Tsoukas (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of process organization studies: 87–109. London, U.K.: SAGE. Google Scholar
    • Farson, R. 1996. Management of the absurd. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster. Google Scholar
    • Fiol, C. M., O’Connor, E. J., & Aguinis, H. 2001. All for one and one for all? The development and transfer of power across organizational levels. Academy of Management Review, 26: 224–242.Link , Google Scholar
    • Fleming, P. 2013. “Down with Big Brother!” The end of “corporate culturalism”? Journal of Management Studies, 50: 474–495. Google Scholar
    • Fleming, P., & Spicer, A. 2014. Power in management and organization science. Academy of Management Annals, 8: 237–298.Link , Google Scholar
    • Foucault, M. 1979. Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. New York, NY: Vintage Books. Google Scholar
    • Foucault, M. 1980. Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972–1977. New York, NY: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Google Scholar
    • Foucault, M. 1984. The history of sexuality, vol. 1: The will to knowledge. New York, NY: Vintage. Google Scholar
    • Fuchs, S. 2001. Beyond agency. Sociological theory, 19: 24–40. Google Scholar
    • Gabriel, Y. 1995. The unmanaged organization: Stories, fantasies and subjectivity. Organization Studies, 16: 477–501. Google Scholar
    • Gherardi, S. 1994. The gender we think, the gender we do in our everyday organizational lives. Human Relations, 47: 591–610. Google Scholar
    • Gherardi, S. 2012. How to conduct a practice-based study: Problems and methods. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar. Google Scholar
    • Giddens, A. 1984. Constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge, U.K.: Polity Press. Google Scholar
    • Gioia, D. A., & Chittipeddi, K. 1991. Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation. Strategic Management Journal, 12: 433–448. Google Scholar
    • Gioia, D. A., & Pitre, E. 1990. Multiparadigm perspectives on theory building. Academy of Management Review, 15: 584–602.Link , Google Scholar
    • Godfrey, R. 2016. Soldiering on: Exploring the role of humour as a disciplinary technology in the military. Organization, 23: 164–183. Google Scholar
    • Goffman, E. 1961. Asylums: Essays on the social situation of mental patients and other inmates. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books. Google Scholar
    • Gondo, M. B., & Amis, J. M. 2013. Variations in practice adoption: The roles of conscious reflection and discourse. Academy of Management Review, 38: 229–247.Link , Google Scholar
    • Gordon, R. 2007. Power, knowledge and domination. Copenhagen, Denmark: Copenhagen Business School Press. Google Scholar
    • Grey, C., & Garsten, C. 2001. Trust, control and post-bureaucracy. Organization Studies, 22: 229–250. Google Scholar
    • Gulati, R., Puranam, P., & Tushman, M. 2012. Meta‐organization design: Rethinking design in interorganizational and community contexts. Strategic Management Journal, 33: 571–586. Google Scholar
    • Habermas, J. 1984. The theory of communicative action. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Google Scholar
    • Hardy, C., & Clegg, S. R. 1996. Some dare call it power. In S. R. CleggC. HardyW. Nord (Eds.), Handbook of organization studies: 368–387. London, U.K.: SAGE. Google Scholar
    • Hardy, C., & Maguire, S. 2016. Organizing risk: Discourse, power, and “riskification.” Academy of Management Review, 41: 80–108.Link , Google Scholar
    • Hargrave, T. J., & Van de Ven, A. H. 2017. Integrating dialectical and paradox perspectives on managing contradictions in organizations. Organization Studies, 38: 319–339. Google Scholar
    • Hatch, M. J. 1997. Irony and the social construction of contradiction in the humor of a management team. Organization Science, 8: 275–288. Google Scholar
    • Hatch, M. J., & Erhlich, S. B. 1993. Spontaneous humour as an indicator of paradox and ambiguity in organizations. Organization Studies, 14: 505–526. Google Scholar
    • Heller, J. 2004. Catch-22: A novel. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster. (Original work published 1961) Google Scholar
    • Hennestad, B. W. 1990. The symbolic impact of double bind leadership: Double bind and the dynamics of organizational culture. Journal of Management Studies, 27: 265–280. Google Scholar
    • Hitlin, S., & Elder, G. H., Jr. 2007. Time, self, and the curiously abstract concept of agency. Sociological theory, 25: 170–191. Google Scholar
    • Hodson, R., Martin, A. W., Lopez, S. H., & Roscigno, V. J. 2013a. Rules don’t apply: Kafka’s insights on bureaucracy. Organization, 20: 256–278. Google Scholar
    • Hodson, R., Roscigno, V. J., Martin, A., & Lopez, S. H. 2013b. The ascension of Kafkaesque bureaucracy in private sector organizations. Human Relations, 66: 1249–1273. Google Scholar
    • Holt, R., & Zundel, M. 2017. What paradox? Developing a process synthax for oranizational research. In W. K. SmithM. W. LewisP. JarzabkowskiA. Langley (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of organizational paradox: 87–104. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
    • Huq, J.-L., Reay, T., & Chreim, S. 2017. Protecting the paradox of interprofessional collaboration. Organization Studies, 38: 513–538. Google Scholar
    • Irvine, A. D., & Deutsch, H. 2016. Russell’s paradox. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Winter 2016 ed.). Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/russell-paradox Google Scholar
    • Isaac, M. 2017, February 22. Inside Uber’s aggressive, unrestrained workplace culture. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/22/technology/uber-workplace-culture.html Google Scholar
    • Jarzabkowski, P., Lê, J. K., & Van de Ven, A. H. 2013. Responding to competing strategic demands: How organizing, belonging, and performing paradoxes coevolve. Strategic Organization, 11: 245–280. Google Scholar
    • Jarzabkowski, P., Sillince, J. A. A., & Shaw, D. 2010. Strategic ambiguity as a rhetorical resource for enabling multiple interests. Human Relations, 63: 219–248. Google Scholar
    • Jarzabkowski, P. A., & Lê, J. K. 2017. We have to do this and that? You must be joking: Constructing and responding to paradox through humor. Organization Studies, 38: 433–462. Google Scholar
    • Jay, J. 2013. Navigating paradox as a mechanism of change and innovation in hybrid organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 56: 137–159.Link , Google Scholar
    • Josserand, E., Teo, S., & Clegg, S. R. 2006. From bureaucratic to post-bureaucratic: The difficulties of transition. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 19: 54–64. Google Scholar
    • Kafka, F. 2009. The trial (M. Mitchell, Trans.). Oxford, U.K.: Oxford World Classics. (Original work published 1925) Google Scholar
    • Kahneman, D. 2011. Thinking, fast and slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Google Scholar
    • Kärreman, D., & Alvesson, M. 2009. Resisting resistance: Counter-resistance, consent and compliance in a consultancy firm. Human Relations, 62: 1115–1144. Google Scholar
    • Keller, J., Loewenstein, J., & Yan, J. 2017. Culture, conditions and paradoxical frames. Organization Studies, 38: 539–560. Google Scholar
    • Kim, P. H., Pinkley, R. L., & Fragale, A. R. 2005. Power dynamics in negotiation. Academy of Management Review, 30: 799–822.Link , Google Scholar
    • Knight, E., & Paroutis, S. 2017. Becoming salient: The TMT leader’s role in shaping the interpretive context of paradoxical tensions. Organization Studies, 38: 403–432. Google Scholar
    • Korczynski, M. 2011. The dialectical sense of humour: Routine joking in a Taylorized factory. Organization Studies, 32: 1421–1439. Google Scholar
    • Kornberger, M., Clegg, S. R., & Carter, C. 2006. Rethinking the polyphonic organization: Managing as discursive practice. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 22: 3–30. Google Scholar
    • Lawrence, T. B., Mauws, M. K., Dyck, B., & Kleysen, R. F. 2005. The politics of organizational learning: Integrating power into the 4I framework. Academy of Management Review, 30: 180–191.Link , Google Scholar
    • Ledeneva, A. V. 1998. Russia’s economy of favours: Blat, networking and informal exchange. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
    • Leonardi, P. M. 2011. When flexible routines meet flexible technologies: Affordance, constraint, and the imbrication of human and material agencies. MIS Quarterly, 35: 147–167. Google Scholar
    • Lewis, M. W. 2000. Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide. Academy of Management Review, 25: 760–776.Link , Google Scholar
    • Lewis, M. W., & Smith, W. K. 2014. Paradox as a metatheoretical perspective: Sharpening the focus and widening the scope. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 50: 127–149. Google Scholar
    • Lok, J., & Willmott, H. 2013. Identities and identifications in organizations: Dynamics of antipathy, deadlock, and alliance. Journal of Management Inquiry, 23: 215–230. Google Scholar
    • Luhmann, N. 1995a. The paradoxy of observing systems. Cultural critique, 31: 37–55. Google Scholar
    • Luhmann, N. 1995b. Social systems. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Google Scholar
    • Lundmark, E., & Westelius, A. 2012. Exploring entrepreneurship as misbehavior. In A. BarnesL. Taksa (Eds.), Rethinking misbehavior and resistance in organizations, vol. 19: 209–235. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald Group Publishing. Google Scholar
    • Lüscher, L. S., & Lewis, M. W. 2008. Organizational change and managerial sensemaking: Working through paradox. Academy of Management Journal, 51: 221–240.Link , Google Scholar
    • Lynskey, D. 2019. The ministry of truth: A biography of George Orwell’s 1984. Basingstoke, U.K.: Pan Macmillan. Google Scholar
    • March, J. G. 2010. The ambiguities of experience. Cornell, NY: Cornell University Press. Google Scholar
    • March, J. G., Schulz, M., & Zhou, X. 2000. The dynamics of rules: Change in written organizational codes. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Google Scholar
    • Martin de Holan, P. 2011. Agency in voluntary organizational forgetting. Journal of Management Inquiry, 20: 317–322. Google Scholar
    • Mazmanian, M., Orlikowski, W. J., & Yates, J. 2013. The autonomy paradox: The implications of mobile email devices for knowledge professionals. Organization Science, 24: 1337–1357. Google Scholar
    • McCabe, D. 2009. Enterprise contested: Betwixt and between the discourses of career and enterprise in a UK bank. Human Relations, 62: 1551–1579. Google Scholar
    • McCabe, D. 2014. Light in the darkness? Managers in the back office of a Kafkaesque bank. Organization Studies, 35: 255–278. Google Scholar
    • McIver, D., Lengnick-Hall, C. A., Lengnick-Hall, M. L., & Ramachandran, I. 2013. Understanding work and knowledge management from a knowledge in- practice perspective. Academy of Management Review, 38: 597–620.Link , Google Scholar
    • McKenna, S., Garcia-Lorenzo, L., & Bridgman, T. 2010. Managing, managerial control and managerial identity in the post-bureaucratic world. Journal of Management Development, 29: 128–136. Google Scholar
    • McPherson, C. M., & Sauder, M. 2013. Logics in action: Managing institutional complexity in a drug court. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58: 165–196. Google Scholar
    • Meyerson, D. E., & Scully, M. A. 1995. Crossroads tempered radicalism and the politics of ambivalence and change. Organization Science, 6: 585–600. Google Scholar
    • Miller, D. 1993. The architecture of simplicity. Academy of Management Review, 18: 116–138.Link , Google Scholar
    • Miron-Spektor, E., Gino, F., & Argote, L. 2011. Paradoxical frames and creative sparks: Enhancing individual creativity through conflict and integration. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 116: 229–240. Google Scholar
    • Miron-Spektor, E., Ingram, A., Keller, J., Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. 2018. Microfoundations of organizational paradox: The problem is how we think about the problem. Academy of Management Journal, 61: 26–45.Link , Google Scholar
    • Morrison, E. W., & Milliken, F. J. 2000. Organizational silence: A barrier to change and development in a pluralistic world. Academy of Management Review, 25: 706–725.Link , Google Scholar
    • Mumby, D. K., Thomas, R., Martí, I., & Seidl, D. 2017. Resistance redux. Organization Studies, 38: 1157–1183. Google Scholar
    • Munro, I., & Huber, C. 2012. Kafka’s mythology: Organization, bureaucracy and the limits of sensemaking. Human Relations, 65: 523–543. Google Scholar
    • O’Connor, D. J. 1948. Pragmatic paradoxes. Mind, 57: 358–359. Google Scholar
    • Oakley, J. G. 2000. Gender-based barriers to senior management positions: Understanding the scarcity of female CEOs. Journal of Business Ethics, 27: 321–334. Google Scholar
    • Orlikowski, W. J. 2007. Sociomaterial practices: Exploring technology at work. Organization Studies, 28: 1435–1448. Google Scholar
    • Orr, J. E. 1996. Talking about machines: An ethnography of a modern job. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Google Scholar
    • Orwell, G. 1949. Nineteen eighty-four. London, U.K.: Martin Secker & Warburg. Google Scholar
    • Parker, M. 2000. Organizational culture and identity: Unity and division at work. London, U.K.: SAGE. Google Scholar
    • Pérezts, M., Bouilloud, J.-P., & de Gaulejac, V. 2011. Serving two masters: The contradictory organization as an ethical challenge for managerial responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 101: 33–44. Google Scholar
    • Pfeffer, J. 1992. Managing with power: Politics and influence in organizations. Harvard, MA: Harvard Business Press. Google Scholar
    • Poole, M. S., & Van de Ven, A. H. 1989. Using paradox to build management and organization theories. Academy of Management Review, 14: 562–578.Link , Google Scholar
    • Putnam, L. L. 1986. Contradictions and paradoxes in organizations. In L. Thayer (Ed.), Organization communications: Emerging perspectives: 151–167. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing. Google Scholar
    • Putnam, L. L., Fairhurst, G. T., & Banghart, S. 2016. Contradictions, dialectics, and paradoxes in organizations: A constitutive approach. Academy of Management Annals, 10: 65–171.Link , Google Scholar
    • Putnam, L. L., Myers, K. K., & Gailliard, B. M. 2014. Examining the tensions in workplace flexibility and exploring options for new directions. Human Relations, 67: 413–440. Google Scholar
    • Rieber, R. W., & Vetter, H. J. 1995. The psychopathology of language and cognition. New York, NY: Springer Science & Business Media. Google Scholar
    • Rosen, M. 1988. You asked for it: Christmas at the bosses’ expense. Journal of Management Studies, 25: 463–480. Google Scholar
    • Sayer, A. 2007. Dignity at work: Broadening the agenda. Organization, 14: 565–581. Google Scholar
    • Schad, J. 2017. Ad Fontes. Philosophical foundations of paradox research. In W. K. SmithM. W. LewisP. JarzabkowskiA. Langley (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of organizational paradox: 27–47. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
    • Schad, J., Lewis, M. W., Raisch, S., & Smith, W. K. 2016. Paradox research in management science: Looking back to move forward. Academy of Management Annals, 10: 5–64.Link , Google Scholar
    • Schad, J., Lewis, M. W., & Smith, W. K. 2019. Quo vadis, paradox? Centripetal and centrifugal forces in theory development. Strategic Organization, 17: 107–119. Google Scholar
    • Schnackenberg, A. K., & Tomlinson, E. C. 2016. Organizational transparency: A new perspective on managing trust in organization–stakeholder relationships. Journal of Management, 42: 1784–1810. Google Scholar
    • Scott, J. C. 1985. Weapons of the weak: Everyday forms of peasant resistance. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Google Scholar
    • Sewell, G. 1998. The discipline of teams: The control of team-based industrial work through electronic and peer surveillance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43: 397–428. Google Scholar
    • Sewell, J. W. H. 1992. A theory of structure: Duality, agency, and transformation. American Journal of Sociology, 98: 1–29. Google Scholar
    • Sharma, G., & Good, D. 2013. The work of middle managers: Sensemaking and sensegiving for creating positive social change. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 49: 95–122. Google Scholar
    • Shen, W., & Cannella, A. A. 2002. Power dynamics within top management and their impacts on CEO dismissal followed by inside succession. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 1195–1206.Link , Google Scholar
    • Simpson, A. V., & Berti, M. 2020. Transcending organizational compassion paradoxes by enacting wise compassion courageously. Journal of Management Inquiry, 29: 433–449. Google Scholar
    • Simpson, A. V., Clegg, S. R., & Pitsis, T. 2014. “I used to care but things have changed”: A genealogy of compassion in organizational theory. Journal of Management Inquiry, 23: 347–359. Google Scholar
    • Smets, M., Jarzabkowski, P., Burke, G. T., & Spee, P. 2015. Reinsurance trading in Lloyd’s of London: Balancing conflicting-yet-complementary logics in practice. Academy of Management Journal, 58: 932–970.Link , Google Scholar
    • Smith, W. K. 2014. Dynamic decision making: A model of senior leaders managing strategic paradoxes. Academy of Management Journal, 57: 1592–1623.Link , Google Scholar
    • Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. 2011. Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36: 381–403.Link , Google Scholar
    • Smith, W. K., & Tushman, M. L. 2005. Managing strategic contradictions: A top management model for managing innovation streams. Organization Science, 16: 522–536. Google Scholar
    • Stohl, C., & Cheney, G. 2001. Participatory processes/paradoxical practices communication and the dilemmas of organizational democracy. Management Communication Quarterly, 14: 349–407. Google Scholar
    • Sutherland, N., Land, C., & Böhm, S. 2014. Anti-leaders(hip) in social movement organizations: The case of autonomous grassroots groups. Organization, 21: 759–781. Google Scholar
    • Taylor, J. R., & Van Every, E. J. 2010. The situated organization: Case studies in the pragmatics of communication research. New York, NY: Routledge. Google Scholar
    • Thompson, P., Warhurst, C., & Callaghan, G. 2001. Ignorant theory and knowledgeable workers: Interrogating the connections between knowledge, skills and services. Journal of Management Studies, 38: 923–942. Google Scholar
    • Timothy Coombs, W., & Holladay, S. J. 2012. Amazon.com’s Orwellian nightmare: Exploring apology in an online environment. Journal of Communication Management, 16: 280–295. Google Scholar
    • Tracy, S. J. 2004. Dialectic, contradiction, or double bind? Analyzing and theorizing employee reactions to organizational tension. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 32: 119–146. Google Scholar
    • Tsoukas, H., & Cunha, M. P. e. 2017. On organizational circularity: Vicious and virtuous cycles in organizing. In W. K. SmithM. W. LewisP. JarzabkowskiA. Langley (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of organizational paradox: 393–412. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
    • Tye-Williams, S., & Krone, K. J. 2017. Identifying and re-imagining the paradox of workplace bullying advice. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 45: 218–235. Google Scholar
    • van Bommel, K., & Spicer, A. 2017. Critical management studies and paradox. In W. K. SmithM. W. LewisP. JarzabkowskiA. Langley (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of organizational paradox: 143–161. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
    • van Marrewijk, A., Clegg, S. R., Pitsis, T. S., & Veenswijk, M. 2008. Managing public–private megaprojects: Paradoxes, complexity, and project design. International Journal of Project Management, 26: 591–600. Google Scholar
    • Vannini, P. 2008. Situatedness. In L. M. Given (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods: 815–816. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Google Scholar
    • Vince, R., & Broussine, M. 1996. Paradox, defense and attachment: Accessing and working with emotions and relations underlying organizational change. Organization Studies, 17: 1–21. Google Scholar
    • Wagner, J. A. I. 1978. The organizational double bind: Toward an understanding of rationality and its complement. Academy of Management Review, 3: 786–795.Link , Google Scholar
    • Warner, M. 2007. Kafka, Weber and organization theory. Human Relations, 60: 1019–1038. Google Scholar
    • Watzlawick, P. 1965. Paradoxical predictions. Psychiatry, 28: 368–374. Google Scholar
    • Watzlawick, P., Jackson, D. D., & Bavelas, J. B. 1967. Pragmatics of human communication: A study of interactional patterns, pathologies, and paradoxes. New York, NY: Norton. Google Scholar
    • Weber, M. 1964. The theory of social and economic organization. New York, NY: Free Press. (Original work published 1920) Google Scholar
    • Weber, M. 1978. Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. (Original work published 1922) Google Scholar
    • Weick, K. E. 1995. Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Google Scholar
    • Wendt, R. F. 1995. Women in positions of service: The politicized body. Communication Studies, 46: 276–296. Google Scholar
    • Wendt, R. F. 1998. The sound of one hand clapping counterintuitive lessons extracted from paradoxes and double binds in participative organizations. Management Communication Quarterly, 11: 323–371. Google Scholar
    • Wiesenfeld, B. M., Raghuram, S., & Garud, R. 1999. Communication patterns as determinants of organizational identification in a virtual organization. Organization Science, 10: 777–790. Google Scholar
    • Willmott, H. 1993. Strength is ignorance; slavery is freedom: Managing culture in modern organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 30: 515–552. Google Scholar
    • Willmott, H. 2013. “The substitution of one piece of nonsense for another”: Reflections on resistance, gaming, and subjugation. Journal of Management Studies, 50: 443–473. Google Scholar
    • Worline, M., & Dutton, J. E. 2017. Awakening compassion at work: The quiet power that elevates people and organizations. Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Google Scholar
    • Zanoni, P., & Janssens, M. 2007. Minority employees engaging with (diversity) management: An analysis of control, agency, and micro-emancipation. Journal of Management Studies, 44: 1371–1397. Google Scholar
    Academy of Management
      Academy of Management
      100 Summit Lake Drive, Suite 110
      Valhalla, NY 10595, USA
      Phone: +1 (914) 326-1800
      Fax: +1 (914) 326-1900
    © 2024 Academy of Management
    Powered by Atypon® Literatum